the future of combustion engines?
Discussion
So then gents
as some of you may know I've been involved in engine design and development my entire professional life, with a short break to design spacecraft instruments
now of late with the rise of electric powertrains I'm getting regularly ribbed about the future of my profession, what will you do etc etc
personally I think the combustion engine has another 20 years in it, probably longer as its still a good solution when you look at the complete picture of what an electric vehicle costs to buy and support and make.
what are others thoughts?
or shall I just segue into making batteries ( my god they're dull)
as some of you may know I've been involved in engine design and development my entire professional life, with a short break to design spacecraft instruments
now of late with the rise of electric powertrains I'm getting regularly ribbed about the future of my profession, what will you do etc etc
personally I think the combustion engine has another 20 years in it, probably longer as its still a good solution when you look at the complete picture of what an electric vehicle costs to buy and support and make.
what are others thoughts?
or shall I just segue into making batteries ( my god they're dull)
IC engines will be around for a long time yet.
Whether people like them or pretend not to. They get the job done and are damn efficient at it.
There is bizarrely a lot of hate for cars and transport, despite it giving everyone the luxuries and freedoms they crave. People are mental.
Batteries are crap, inefficient, dangerous, although if a suitable power supply is found for electric motors, electric motors are indeed very good.
But will you ever see standby batteries for power supplies for say a hospital ? or other important places in lieu of a generator ?
Will we ever see masses of batteries in remote regions for power in lieu of a generator ?
Battery powered trucks and haulage covering hundreds of miles a day ? Battery powered aircraft including helicopters etc ?
There are many things electric and batteries are damn good at......transport that can go anywhere, any time...is not one of them.
And a breakthrough in batteries still seems decades away.
Whether people like them or pretend not to. They get the job done and are damn efficient at it.
There is bizarrely a lot of hate for cars and transport, despite it giving everyone the luxuries and freedoms they crave. People are mental.
Batteries are crap, inefficient, dangerous, although if a suitable power supply is found for electric motors, electric motors are indeed very good.
But will you ever see standby batteries for power supplies for say a hospital ? or other important places in lieu of a generator ?
Will we ever see masses of batteries in remote regions for power in lieu of a generator ?
Battery powered trucks and haulage covering hundreds of miles a day ? Battery powered aircraft including helicopters etc ?
There are many things electric and batteries are damn good at......transport that can go anywhere, any time...is not one of them.
And a breakthrough in batteries still seems decades away.
There are a few myths: CO2, NOx and particulates are all due to private cars. In fact, private cars do not dominate CO2 production. For NOx or particulates, they are insignificant. Electric cars will solve everything: no, they produce new problems.
The spark-ignition engine produces negligible NOx and particulates. It can be very efficient (if we went to hybrids using the engine to re-charge a battery, it can be extremely efficient). Petrol is very convenient as a fuel. A can, that could be filled in a couple of minutes and that a child might carry, will take you from London to Liverpool and most of the way back. By comparison, batteries are a pain.
Apart from the misery of re-charging, if we replace all fossil fuel combustion with electric power, the electric generation and distribution system is going to be overloaded. We need to build a couple of nuclear power stations very quickly, while experience shows we can't manage one.
Electric cars are heavy and produce maximum torque from zero speed. Every problem associated with tyres on the road surface, such as road surface damage or particulate generation, will be exacerbated.
For those who say look at how low pollution was during the lock down with no cars. Well, there was also no industry, no construction work, and the weather was great so no central heating and no wood burners.
Are there too many car journeys? Yes, but that's because we have rubbish public transport and over centralised services. EVs might serve for going to the shops, the doctor or the post office, and all the things that should be in walking or bus-ride distance. But, as far as I'm concerned, for everything else, they make things worse for everyone.
The spark-ignition engine produces negligible NOx and particulates. It can be very efficient (if we went to hybrids using the engine to re-charge a battery, it can be extremely efficient). Petrol is very convenient as a fuel. A can, that could be filled in a couple of minutes and that a child might carry, will take you from London to Liverpool and most of the way back. By comparison, batteries are a pain.
Apart from the misery of re-charging, if we replace all fossil fuel combustion with electric power, the electric generation and distribution system is going to be overloaded. We need to build a couple of nuclear power stations very quickly, while experience shows we can't manage one.
Electric cars are heavy and produce maximum torque from zero speed. Every problem associated with tyres on the road surface, such as road surface damage or particulate generation, will be exacerbated.
For those who say look at how low pollution was during the lock down with no cars. Well, there was also no industry, no construction work, and the weather was great so no central heating and no wood burners.
Are there too many car journeys? Yes, but that's because we have rubbish public transport and over centralised services. EVs might serve for going to the shops, the doctor or the post office, and all the things that should be in walking or bus-ride distance. But, as far as I'm concerned, for everything else, they make things worse for everyone.
Electric cars should be for city centre transport only, and should be sized accordingly.
That way they can be kept small, range is never an issue, parking is easier, and they will be cheaper for the masses.
Building big massive heavy electric cars that are s
te at being cars....is daft.
Likewise, vans working in cities have the potential to be electrified, simply as many will always go known routes, known mileage and can be easier planned, ie likes of Royal Mail.
Of course not all such vehicles can, but these, and buses and all public transport including the likes of black Taxis should be the first that are pushed to battery power.
And all the green hypocrites should be forced to move all their home heating or aircon to electric, and all the other huge range of comforts they use that cause pollution but they'd never acknowledge.
And even small items like gardening equipment. All small pieces, but all so easy and practical to be made electric.
But instead, they always attack cars, despite them not remotely being the actual problem.
That way they can be kept small, range is never an issue, parking is easier, and they will be cheaper for the masses.
Building big massive heavy electric cars that are s
te at being cars....is daft.Likewise, vans working in cities have the potential to be electrified, simply as many will always go known routes, known mileage and can be easier planned, ie likes of Royal Mail.
Of course not all such vehicles can, but these, and buses and all public transport including the likes of black Taxis should be the first that are pushed to battery power.
And all the green hypocrites should be forced to move all their home heating or aircon to electric, and all the other huge range of comforts they use that cause pollution but they'd never acknowledge.
And even small items like gardening equipment. All small pieces, but all so easy and practical to be made electric.
But instead, they always attack cars, despite them not remotely being the actual problem.
Peter3442 said:
Petrol is very convenient as a fuel. A can, that could be filled in a couple of minutes and that a child might carry, will take you from London to Liverpool and most of the way back.
You must know some very strong children. London to Liverpool & most the the way back is at least 350 miles so 7 gallons or more of petrol. A gallon of petrol weighs around 6 lb, so 42lb + the container. You think that political decision making in this area will be based on facts and logic?
I very much doubt that the UK general public will be able to buy petrol or diesel for transport or pleasure use within 20 years.
There will be plenty of places in the world where IC engines will be used in personal transportation and perhaps engine design will continue in the UK much as it does now. Lot's of things are designed and developed in places they are not intended to be used.
I very much doubt that the UK general public will be able to buy petrol or diesel for transport or pleasure use within 20 years.
There will be plenty of places in the world where IC engines will be used in personal transportation and perhaps engine design will continue in the UK much as it does now. Lot's of things are designed and developed in places they are not intended to be used.
Glosphil said:
You must know some very strong children. London to Liverpool & most the the way back is at least 350 miles so 7 gallons or more of petrol. A gallon of petrol weighs around 6 lb, so 42lb + the container.
Yes, I know some very strong children. They train by carrying huge batteries.More seriously, my original comment was a lot longer and I cut some pieces, which resulted in an unfortunate concatenation. The child in question was to carry four litres, enough for an economical car to travel from London to Oxford. And the journey from London to Liverpool was for an uneconomical Daimler Double Six starting with full tanks.
However, I'm sure you grasp my point that gasoline is a very conveninent way of transferring energy.
mtrehy said:
You think that political decision making in this area will be based on facts and logic?
I very much doubt that the UK general public will be able to buy petrol or diesel for transport or pleasure use within 20 years.
There will be plenty of places in the world where IC engines will be used in personal transportation and perhaps engine design will continue in the UK much as it does now. Lot's of things are designed and developed in places they are not intended to be used.
If that were to be true, the entire economy would have collapsed too in 20 years.I very much doubt that the UK general public will be able to buy petrol or diesel for transport or pleasure use within 20 years.
There will be plenty of places in the world where IC engines will be used in personal transportation and perhaps engine design will continue in the UK much as it does now. Lot's of things are designed and developed in places they are not intended to be used.
stevieturbo said:
IC engines will be around for a long time yet..
Personally, give it 5 years for anything ICE in the passenger car segement that isn't some sort of special case, ie high performance / V. expensiveToday, (and in fact for the last 3 years) the OEs are hugely scaling back their ICE development programs and focusing on BEV. BEVs have simply completely changed the game to a point where no ICE can even start to complete.
stevieturbo said:
Whether people like them or pretend not to. They get the job done and are damn efficient at it.
I'm not really sure what this ^^ means. Today, you can still plough a field with a steam traction engine. It would still "get the job done" and yet nobody does. If a single commerical agriculture field was ploughed by a steam traction engine in 2020 i'd be amazed. And in the same vein, an ICE is not "damm efficienct" quite the opposite in fact. A typical mass produced petrol or diesel ICE is at absolute best around 30% efficienct. Ie it wastes 70% of the energy you put into it. You can be the greatest advocate for ICEs in the world, but to claim they are effiicient is nonsense.
stevieturbo said:
Batteries are crap, inefficient, dangerous, although if a suitable power supply is found for electric motors, electric motors are indeed very good.
No they aren't. That's nonsense. Today our world is already powered by batteries, there are billions, and billions and BILLIONs of them in use. Yes, a few fail, a few even catch on fire, but relatively speaking, batteries are a far safer way to store energy than any liquid hydrocarbon fuel.stevieturbo said:
But will you ever see standby batteries for power supplies for say a hospital ? or other important places in lieu of a generator ?
Will we ever see masses of batteries in remote regions for power in lieu of a generator ?
er, you know that lots of commerical properties already use battery storage and that pretty much all data servers use battery UPS? Yes, they also probably have diesel back up, but that is not fast enough to react, or reliable enough to completely rely on. And now that battery costs are falling, enitre areas are now "battery backed"Will we ever see masses of batteries in remote regions for power in lieu of a generator ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornsdale_Power_Rese...
Not just installed but actually PROFITABLE, ie making money for it's owners. Try that with a deisel genset....
stevieturbo said:
Battery powered trucks and haulage covering hundreds of miles a day ? Battery powered aircraft including helicopters etc ?
There are many things electric and batteries are damn good at......transport that can go anywhere, any time...is not one of them.
And a breakthrough in batteries still seems decades away.
It's comming on a grand scale. Today, small scale battery electric prime movers are already in use (like the mine trucks that "make" their own fuel because they climb a mountain empty and come back down full of rock: https://www.electrive.com/2018/04/23/empas-edumper... )There are many things electric and batteries are damn good at......transport that can go anywhere, any time...is not one of them.
And a breakthrough in batteries still seems decades away.
All the Prime Mover manufacturers and the large engine firms like Cat / Cummins etc are also heavily spending on Electrification, because it is efficient, and it is cleaner than ICE, and because public opinion has swung rapidly towards the adoption of more environmentally friendly transport options.
Now i know you know a LOT about ICE's and tuning and i have a huge respect for that knowledge and experience, but please don't let your ICE biases trick you into spouting nonsense about Batteries or EVs.
350Matt said:
So then gents
as some of you may know I've been involved in engine design and development my entire professional life, with a short break to design spacecraft instruments
now of late with the rise of electric powertrains I'm getting regularly ribbed about the future of my profession, what will you do etc etc
personally I think the combustion engine has another 20 years in it, probably longer as its still a good solution when you look at the complete picture of what an electric vehicle costs to buy and support and make.
what are others thoughts?
or shall I just segue into making batteries ( my god they're dull)
Dull? Define Dull? Anything can be dull, it's what YOU make it. I moved from ICE to Electrification some 18 years ago, and in that time ive worked on the most EXCITING Projects i've ever worked on. Incredible performance, complex engineering challenges, new cutting edge technology, new (to me) science and physcis that i have to understand and master.as some of you may know I've been involved in engine design and development my entire professional life, with a short break to design spacecraft instruments
now of late with the rise of electric powertrains I'm getting regularly ribbed about the future of my profession, what will you do etc etc
personally I think the combustion engine has another 20 years in it, probably longer as its still a good solution when you look at the complete picture of what an electric vehicle costs to buy and support and make.
what are others thoughts?
or shall I just segue into making batteries ( my god they're dull)
I think the possibilites are endless for EV's, far far more interesting than ICE which really, is at the end of it's development life, where everything is already perfected as far as it can be. From a performance and dynamics perspective electricfication opens up a vast relm of possibilities that are simply impossible for a conventional ICE car. The fundamental ability to both disconnect and remotely locate the ultra high efficiency, ultra high specific power density traction motor from it's larger and heavier (today, but size and mass is falling rapidly) energy source bring such interesting benefits from a dynamic perspective, but also allow us to, if we want, rewite what a "car" actually is. Today, pretty much every car looks the same, because you have to package it in the same way. Designed might add a wing here, a scoop or a crease there, but they are really just icing a cake that is already baked. BEVs have so many more possibilites (most of which granted, are too 'out there' for the market place today ;-)
EVs are already changing the game. We bought our EV nearly 5 years ago, and have gone from a daily commute at an average of just under 40 mpg, to the same commute, at the same speed, at just over 180 mpg equivalent! Pretty soon, people are going to come to terms with those sorts of numbers, and when they do, anything under about 150 mpg is, imo, going to become socially unacceptable pretty fast, just as smoking "suddenly" did.
As an engineer, to lead that sort of sea change in our automotive environment is EXCITING!!!
AER said:
So Mahle Jet Ignition is not game-changing...?
no it's not imo, because all it does is make an ICE a biit more efficient, but it requires even more complexity and cost to leverage that efficiency game, and it still can't fill the tank back up with fuel when you lift off!Jet ignition was of course pioneered by a friend of ours whilst working at Mercedes F1 all those years ago, and used in F1 enables those engines to return excellent (for an ICE) thermal efficiency. But that's irrelevant for passenger cars. Why would you spend £10M developing a system to decrease energy consumption by say 15% (which would be huge for an ICE) when you can spend half that and decrease energy consumption by 300% and cut the cost of your product by 50% AND make the end product simpler, more reliable and have ZERO tailpipe emissions?
As i say, and have been saying for at least 5 years, the reasion EVs will dominate passcar markets in a very short period is because they aren't even playing the same game!
Max_Torque said:
er, you know that lots of commerical properties already use battery storage and that pretty much all data servers use battery UPS? Yes, they also probably have diesel back up, but that is not fast enough to react, or reliable enough to completely rely on. And now that battery costs are falling, enitre areas are now "battery backed"
I will politely challenge that assertation that data servers still use battery UPS, yes this was true in legacy datacentres but we now try to avoid batteries at all costs in newer hyperscale designs, they are nothing but a pain in the backside when you start dealing with large scale!I can only speak for the hyperscaler I work for, but for datacentre level power redundancy we use diesel generators and supercapacitors at the rack level (cheap, good discharge rates and dense enough for a few minutes run time ....... perfect till the generators kick in) to carry over till the generators kick in (anecdotally the other 2 main players seem to do the same). We got rid of battery UPSs back in 2016.
In the long run we are seeing fuel cell being more reliable and cost efficient for energy storage at hyperscale level infrastructure. Yes there are issues with fuel cell as well, but early test units are impressive (and more suitable for immersing in the ocean! ;-))
Personally, back when I worked in HW design on x86 servers, the component that caused us the most issues, both at the design phase and post release, were the battery packs that we used to provide cache consistency. The annual Samsung, LG component meeting was always full of promises on supposed "game changing" battery tech, never appeared. Sadly I believe that battery technology is ultimately going to hold back the EV story given its the batteries that are the cause of weight, charge time issues (i.e all the bits people moan about), annoying because the potential of electric motors for vehicle dynamics is, as you say, impressive!
Its a shame that government/industry have gone all in on an energy storage technology that appears to be a dead end. Yes graphene is promising but years away from mass production and those that have already sunk billions into lithium plants aren't going to want to switch.
Sadly I can see the positioning of EV vehicles on the Garner Hype Curve as we speak, just about to crest the Peak of Inflated Expectations I reckon ...............
Max_Torque said:
I'm not really sure what this ^^ means. Today, you can still plough a field with a steam traction engine. It would still "get the job done" and yet nobody does. If a single commerical agriculture field was ploughed by a steam traction engine in 2020 i'd be amazed.
And in the same vein, an ICE is not "damm efficienct" quite the opposite in fact. A typical mass produced petrol or diesel ICE is at absolute best around 30% efficienct. Ie it wastes 70% of the energy you put into it. You can be the greatest advocate for ICEs in the world, but to claim they are effiicient is nonsense.
Now i know you know a LOT about ICE's and tuning and i have a huge respect for that knowledge and experience, but please don't let your ICE biases trick you into spouting nonsense about Batteries or EVs.
How many battery tractors are ploughing fields ? or indeed any other large farm equipment ?And in the same vein, an ICE is not "damm efficienct" quite the opposite in fact. A typical mass produced petrol or diesel ICE is at absolute best around 30% efficienct. Ie it wastes 70% of the energy you put into it. You can be the greatest advocate for ICEs in the world, but to claim they are effiicient is nonsense.
Now i know you know a LOT about ICE's and tuning and i have a huge respect for that knowledge and experience, but please don't let your ICE biases trick you into spouting nonsense about Batteries or EVs.
You say batteries can compete....
So I need to do a Journey from Belfast to Cork and back as I've done many times, that's only around 450-500 miles. How many battery vehicles can do that comfortably ?
In my van, I can do it on a tank of fuel.
Or if I take a trip to England, I can easily do 600 miles in a day travelling from here. How many battery vehicles can do that ? ( Biggest urgent run was to London and back, maybe 900-1000 miles in a day )....battery vehicle covering that ?
And yes, ICE's are efficient, in that they will go almost anywhere, are relatively compact and do it with low quantities of fuel storage and are quite clean.
Yes a byproduct is also heat which some may consider waste....not in a cold climate. I consider that damn useful.
And yes we do currently use billions of batteries, in applications where they are well suited. But even then, we can barely get a phone to last more than a day.
And as you well know about a Battery UPS, it's sole purpose is to provide power for a short time for either a safe shutdown, or to allow it to move over to a reliable power source.
I've never heard of a UPS that will run anything for several hours or days if needed.
Again, batteries for that short use application are about the only option ( other than the capacitors mentioned )
And how much Land/space did Teslas big battery take up ? Not really practical for say a hospital, unless they had another hospital sized area to store the batteries ?
But you mention people have swung to more environmentally transport options.
So why are all buses not battery ? They are an ideal candidate ? Why are all Royal Mail vans ? Taxis, government vehicles, ambulances, fire engines, bin lorries etc etc not battery ?
Why aren't governments leading by example, with transport that is very much well suited to battery, instead of forcing the private owners to foot the bill, buying vehicles where in many cases batteries just don't cut it.
Why isn't all home heating electric ? Again, a perfect candidate for it. Likewise large buildings ?
And as you mentioned agricultural vehicles like tractors...why are they not all battery or being pushed that direction ?
I'm not against battery powered vehicles at all, but on practical terms they are not up to par with the ICE except for those who do low miles.
When I was doing courier work, I'd have loved an electric van, but none could even come close to coping with the sort of miles I covered. In fact none could even cover half the miles I'd do in a day.
Yet a van should be an ideal candidate for battery ? Plenty of space available, a bit of extra weight is no big deal.
Yet where are all the battery vans ?
IMO, the private passenger car should have been well down the list of priorities in trying to push to batteries, when there are other vehicles and applications more deserving of it.
Might also add that the pure electric car is dragging a power station around behind it.
As an engineer, I might get excited about a car that uses one electric motor per wheel with the electric power generated by an ultra efficient spark ignition engine. A small battery (or may be something better) would be used for energy storage and city use. It's not my idea, Jim Randle thought of it, probably close to 40 years ago. It offers most of what everyone wants, but is being neglected due to the rush for pure electric.
As someone said, the main push comes from politicians. You know the guys who set the whole car industry into diesels, domestic lighting into fluorescent and halogen - complete masters of sending the world in the wrong direction.
As an engineer, I might get excited about a car that uses one electric motor per wheel with the electric power generated by an ultra efficient spark ignition engine. A small battery (or may be something better) would be used for energy storage and city use. It's not my idea, Jim Randle thought of it, probably close to 40 years ago. It offers most of what everyone wants, but is being neglected due to the rush for pure electric.
As someone said, the main push comes from politicians. You know the guys who set the whole car industry into diesels, domestic lighting into fluorescent and halogen - complete masters of sending the world in the wrong direction.
Peter3442 said:
Might also add that the pure electric car is dragging a power station around behind it.
As an engineer, I might get excited about a car that uses one electric motor per wheel with the electric power generated by an ultra efficient spark ignition engine. A small battery (or may be something better) would be used for energy storage and city use. It's not my idea, Jim Randle thought of it, probably close to 40 years ago. It offers most of what everyone wants, but is being neglected due to the rush for pure electric.
As someone said, the main push comes from politicians. You know the guys who set the whole car industry into diesels, domestic lighting into fluorescent and halogen - complete masters of sending the world in the wrong direction.
The main push also comes from morons like Greta and co, all massive hypocrites in their own rights.As an engineer, I might get excited about a car that uses one electric motor per wheel with the electric power generated by an ultra efficient spark ignition engine. A small battery (or may be something better) would be used for energy storage and city use. It's not my idea, Jim Randle thought of it, probably close to 40 years ago. It offers most of what everyone wants, but is being neglected due to the rush for pure electric.
As someone said, the main push comes from politicians. You know the guys who set the whole car industry into diesels, domestic lighting into fluorescent and halogen - complete masters of sending the world in the wrong direction.
Batteries are not clean, they just move the pollution somewhere else, to be someone elses problem. Something we are pretty good at as a human race.
Now if they can properly recycle batteries, and ensure all power to charge them comes from "clean" energy...then perhaps they might be deemed clean. We're still a very long way off that
People only call it clean now...because they havent dumped enough of them somewhere to realise they are not.
People probably once thought tobacco was clean, oil, plastics, nuclear etc....Until the realised they were not.
Batteries will be that next time bomb.
thanks for the replies chaps
I'd agree we are going to see more and more electric vehicles but I'd also say I can't see a way how 100% EV will become mainstream as the government needs to building the infrastructure to support it now so its ready in the 5-10 years we all supposedly 'want'
I think we are going to be hybrid for a long time
until they enforce that every new home is built with micro generation ( ground source heat pump, solar cells and hydrogen battery for example) there's not capacity in the grid to cope not to mention the issues where 50% of the vehicle population lives on the street and not on your drive
I'm also uncomfortable about where lithium comes from and what kind of labour mines it
I'd agree we are going to see more and more electric vehicles but I'd also say I can't see a way how 100% EV will become mainstream as the government needs to building the infrastructure to support it now so its ready in the 5-10 years we all supposedly 'want'
I think we are going to be hybrid for a long time
until they enforce that every new home is built with micro generation ( ground source heat pump, solar cells and hydrogen battery for example) there's not capacity in the grid to cope not to mention the issues where 50% of the vehicle population lives on the street and not on your drive
I'm also uncomfortable about where lithium comes from and what kind of labour mines it
350Matt said:
thanks for the replies chaps
I'd agree we are going to see more and more electric vehicles but I'd also say I can't see a way how 100% EV will become mainstream as the government needs to building the infrastructure to support it now so its ready in the 5-10 years we all supposedly 'want'
I think we are going to be hybrid for a long time
until they enforce that every new home is built with micro generation ( ground source heat pump, solar cells and hydrogen battery for example) there's not capacity in the grid to cope not to mention the issues where 50% of the vehicle population lives on the street and not on your drive
I'm also uncomfortable about where lithium comes from and what kind of labour mines it
And where will the batteries end up ?I'd agree we are going to see more and more electric vehicles but I'd also say I can't see a way how 100% EV will become mainstream as the government needs to building the infrastructure to support it now so its ready in the 5-10 years we all supposedly 'want'
I think we are going to be hybrid for a long time
until they enforce that every new home is built with micro generation ( ground source heat pump, solar cells and hydrogen battery for example) there's not capacity in the grid to cope not to mention the issues where 50% of the vehicle population lives on the street and not on your drive
I'm also uncomfortable about where lithium comes from and what kind of labour mines it
There hasn't been a huge need to dispose of them yet, but if they do become mainstream, they will have to. Or will they just dig bigger holes in the ground and leave the pollution for the future ?
I'd say the infrastructure to support mass charging is an easy 20+ years off.
There are so many things that could move to electric or battery that would make far more sense than private cars, yet they aren't pushing for those. It makes about as much sense as masks in shops....yet no masks needed in high risk locations.
And the naive public have bought into as some sort of silver bullet it which is truly scary.
And it doesn't even touch the real problem which is human overpopulation.
The future is not bright, but fortunately most of us won't be around to endure it. I really doubt this planet will be a great place to live in another 50-100 years or more.
Powering stuff by a continuous supply of fossil fuels that need to be dug up, refined, bulk transported and stored, is coming towards the end of its life in many respects. It's the principle of the ICE that's now outdated. It's a big mass of rotating, heaving chunks of metal that, in the absence of limited-life lubricant, would be literally grinding each other to pieces. Needs regular servicing. It's a horribly crap solution when compared to electric and, outside of subjective enjoyment, only really wins on convenience of 'recharge', which will be solved as the charging solutions become more widespread and range improves.
Once the dev costs to mass change have been absorbed by he manufacturers and the vehicle ranges renewed from ICE to EV, the days of ICE will be properly numbered.
Massive shame for me, as I love ICE engines and have no emotional interest in EV at all. But there's little logic supporting heavy investment in ICE now.
Once the dev costs to mass change have been absorbed by he manufacturers and the vehicle ranges renewed from ICE to EV, the days of ICE will be properly numbered.
Massive shame for me, as I love ICE engines and have no emotional interest in EV at all. But there's little logic supporting heavy investment in ICE now.
Gassing Station | Engines & Drivetrain | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff